The Instigator
Adam2
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
FrenchieLassiie
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Lowlander history should not be celebrated in Scotland

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Adam2
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/18/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 773 times Debate No: 40769
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Adam2

Pro

I am gonna make the argument. First of all, let me start with a disclaimer. I have nothing against Lowlanders or English in general as a people, but I don't think the brutal history of the Lowlanders should ever be celebrated in Scotland. First of all, here's why: one, the Lowlanders today are really Anglo-Saxons and northern English. Two, Scotland, which prides itself on being a peaceful, accepting country, should not allow a portion of Scotland with a brutal history of imperialism, to be counted as Scottish. "Many of the Klan's founder members were of Scots-Irish heritage, descendants of the Lowland Scots [and northern English] who had been planted in ulster in the 17th century" (http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie...). They were the founders of the Klan basically. "But though the Lowland Scots came to accept the Union, and the Hanoverian succession in 1714, Jacobite resistance continued in the Highlands, culminating in the 1745 rebellion, in which James II's grandson, Charles Edward Stuart, leading an army of Highland clans, captured Edinburgh and marched on London." They were basically the ones who founded the Union, and would later embark on brutal, imperialism.
FrenchieLassiie

Con

I'll accept you debate.

Firstly I would like to challenge your argument

"First of all, here's why: one, the Lowlanders today are really Anglo-Saxons and northern English." I can challenge this by stating like many from west central Scotland I am infect am descendant of families who have travelled back and forth between Scotland and Ireland therefore I can state that this is incorrect.

"Two, Scotland, which prides itself on being a peaceful, accepting country, should not allow a portion of Scotland with a brutal history of imperialism, to be counted as Scottish." Regardless of how we like to view ourselves our history is what it is, some of it is fantastic and other bits not so much. While this is a non historical point, I am pro Scottish independence.

This also depends on what you mean by history, how far do you want to go back? I can't argue that all our history is something to be proud of and there are many things which would irritate me over the past, however I think that it would be a shame to disregard the history of the lowlands.

One example which might be worth considering would be Robert Burns is from south of Ayr which is classed as lowland.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
I had to get this out of my mind and vent it out.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
I wanted it to be quick
Posted by FrenchieLassiie 3 years ago
FrenchieLassiie
Oh we only had one round there? :(
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
Adam2FrenchieLassiieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had more convincing arguments. Con failed in the attempt to try and make Pro's arguments look incorrect.
Vote Placed by jvava 3 years ago
jvava
Adam2FrenchieLassiieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't know much about this debate topic - however, based on things such as resources used and conduct, Pro wins. He made an argument that was backed up by fact, or at least a website; Con simply stated that his facts were wrong without giving reason to why they were wrong. And even if they were incorrect, Pro won - he provided resources is the main reason why.